Public Service Restructuring: briefing

Meeting report

PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
20 August 2003
PUBLIC SERVICE RESTRUCTURING: BRIEFING

Chairperson: Mr P J Gomomo (ANC)

Relevant Documents
Restructuring of the Public Service: Resolution No. 7 of the PSCBC

SUMMARY
The aim of the meeting was a report back from the department of Public Service and Administration on the implementation of resolution No. 7. A progress report was given together with the future plans of the resolution.

MINUTES
Restructuring of the Public Service: Resolution No. 7 of the PSCBC Submission
Mr Kenny Govender (Chief Negotiator DPSA) briefed the Committee on the restructuring of the Public Service.

Please refer to attached presentation.

Discussion
Mr M R Sikakane (ANC) asked for more information on the movement of staff from rural areas based on the presentation, which discussed issues such as family commitments and breadwinner complications.

Dr U Roopnarain said that it seemed as if the rural areas were the hardest hit. What happened when they left the public service (PS)? She also asked for the total number of excess staff being the total staff who worked for the Public Service but who had not been allocated to another position within the Public Service.

Mr M R Baloyi asked about the standoff between SANDTU and the department of education and how they characterised the situation in KZN compared to the other provinces. Secondly he pointed out that the word 'tension' had been used many times so he asked for the unpacking of the word 'tension' and a full explanation of what was going on. Thirdly there had been a comment about the managing of restructuring and he asked how far high level managers were involved. He linked this to the level of participation in the process as to what was achieved. He mentioned the logistical requirements such as photocopying the applications and what impact this had in the rural areas.. Fourthly he asked to what extent there was coordination.

Mr R S Ntuli (DA) asked about the instability in KZN and asked if there was any danger that the situation could spill into other provinces. What about the shortage of health personnel? How did this affect other departments. What happened with the staff that were not easily transferable and what training was being done together with a request for figures. How long were vacancies closed and what was the reason for this?

Mr L M Kgwele (ANC) asked if the restructuring was going the way it was supposed to in order to improve service delivery. He asked what tensions and disputes had arisen from the misrepresentation of the resolution. He then questioned if there was a consideration for incentives for personnel to be deployed to the rural areas in order to improve service delivery.

Mr A Rapea (Executive Manager Deputy Director General) said that the issue of mobility was a lower level one. He gave examples of staff being moved during the amalgamation from the Limpopo province to Pretoria where the cost of living was higher, rent was high, there was no family network, food was costly therefore staff ended up selling their bodies to survive.

The issue of SADTU in KZN was not unique it was just the last one to be resolved. Limpopo and the Western Cape had had the same problems. The issue was over SADTU's 2001 resolution that all educators would be absorbed so they were refusing to be bound by resolution 2002.

The involvement of managers contributed to the delay because of the misinterpretation of the resolution for personal gain. DPSA changed that situation and now for example in Mpumalanga there were consultants in all the departments assisting with the process.

Mr Baloyi interjected and said that some advertisements list maths and science as a requirement so something needs to be done to prevent unnecessary requirements being listed. The department must be alerted.

Mr Rapea said that the process had been well managed thus far, which went against their fears at signage. They were satisfied with the process reminded the committee that restructuring could never be smooth. All things considered there had been no marches and protests hence the process had been well managed and well utilised.

On the issue of closed vacancies the process was still to be followed. If it was a critical vacancy the interdepartmental task team could give the go ahead to open the vacancy. He said that it was not the scarce skill list that was closed to deal with the excess. He said that it was a controlled process because managers could abuse it.

Mr Govender said that there were two packages in the resolution. Firstly if an employee was in excess they could apply and secondly if at the end of the process and there was no transfer they could get a remuneration package. The important thing was to realise their pension before their package was given to them. The total number of excess staff who had not been repositioned was 20 007 as of August 2003.

They were mediating the situation in KZN. SADTU claimed that they had not been part of the process so they had been brought in later on. Implementation of the resolution had been delayed in the province but he pointed out that no educators were in excess in KZN. Talks were still going on to finalise the issues.

Employees in the rural areas did not really apply for vacancies and admittedly finance was involved. There was a new proactive approach where managers were encouraged to physically approach employees to take up positions. He expressed that there was no danger of the issues in KZN spilling into other provinces because the other provinces were finished.

On the issue of incentives he said that it was being dealt with elsewhere but the general idea was to give rural incentives in terms of scarce skills. He explained the use of the term 'tension' as the area of challenge.

He admitted that there was high level management misrepresentation of the resolution but the department picked it up early on and it was dealt with. Grievances tended to centre around transfers based on personal circumstances.

Mr Rapea said that the Public Service was a leading example because everything was in line with the Labour Relations Act. They had committed to a process that was ongoing and that everything had been done that could be done. The issues have recognised a social plan and that from September to June there would be more focused attention which would move the responsibility from the line manager who would then be able to focus on service delivery. The department would be assisting with training, curriculum vitae presentation so that if the staff were retrenched they would have acquired skills so as not to be without an income.

Mr B Mthembu (ANC) commented that the exercise was said to want to create a lean and mean Public Service but it was clear that this was not the case. He discussed Mpumalanga's department of health and the staff increase from 11 000 to 13 000 because the exercise helped them to realise that they were understaffed. The process had assisted a lot. He asked about the issue of personnel refusing to be deployed in rural areas. There was a principle of access to health care for all. He asked about the incentives that had been mentioned and to what extent policy had been taken and how far was the policy development. He asked about the promotions that occurred only to find that those promoted did not have the competencies. He asked how that was possible and how they intended to deal with it.

Mr Sikakane said that the exercise of restructuring was exactly what it should be. He asked the presenters to unpack the meaning of making Public Service more efficient.

Mr Kgwele said that he understood the lean and mean debate so he wanted clarity on whether the Public Service was more effective in service delivery. The speakers had mentioned the department of health and salary dispensation. This was not only a problem in health - the fact was that rural people had always been marginalised. Improved service delivery in rural areas should be the focus. What about the plans to expand services to the rural areas?

Mr Rapea said the policy of incentives and rural deployment was to increase services. He said that it was a policy long debate and if the committee would allow the department to come back and present on the issue because he would have more information then. A substantial amount of money had been allocated to fund the policy in the relevant departments because they did not want to prescribe. Departments must look at their situation and decide what they wanted to see. The money was to be based on the circumstances the department faced.

In health everyone was at the same level. He explained that when human resources needed more nurses at level six they promoted nurses. He said that it was a directive that salaries were never decreased so it was technically a phrase issue so that there was an adjustment. He said that it would be dealt with over the long run because the increase at the end of the year was based on performance and over the long period it would balance itself out. He cautioned sensitivity because they did want to retain personnel. They were looking at allowances for incentives.

Mr Govender explained that trained nurses progress to professional nurses at the rate of their profession. Nurses move up but the job they were doing did not change. The salary in terms of Public Service legislation did not change if there was a transfer or a demotion.

Mr Gomomo said that he did not hear the response for the use of incentives to attract professionals to rural areas.

Mr Rapea explained that he had not responded but had asked for a separate meeting instead.

Meeting was adjourned.